Q&A
Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour, Robin Wright
{
"authors": [
"Karim Sadjadpour"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Nuclear Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Don't Rush to War with Iran
The challenge set by Iran’s nuclear program is a post-American challenge.
Published on Nov 13, 2011
Source: GPS with Fareed Zakaria. November 13
The International Atomic Energy Agency recently released a report on Iran’s nuclear program and expressed for the first time concerns about a military dimension to the program. The report has revived the debate as to whether or not Israel or the United States should employ military action. Karim Sadjadpour argues that “the case for military action is not compelling” because “it is a simple mathematical question. Bombing Iran’s nuclear sites would set the nuclear clock back two or three years, but would resuscitate a deeply unpopular, ideologically bankrupt regime, prolonging its shelf life.” Indeed, most Iranians, despite their profound disaffection with the regime, are opposed to military action. While there is no doubt that this regime is odious, “it has homicidal tendencies, but is not suicidal,” notes Sadjadpour.
The challenge set by Iranian’s nuclear program is really a “post-American challenge,” asserts Sadjadpour. There are two options, in terms of coercion, that the Obama administration can take. The first is to impose draconian sanctions with a weak coalition that does not include important states like China, India and Russia. Alternatively, the administration can pursue more mild sanctions with a robust international coalition. The second approach is much more likely to pressure Iran to give up its nuclear program.
About the Author
Karim Sadjadpour
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Karim Sadjadpour is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on Iran and U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East.
- What’s Keeping the Iranian Regime in Power—for Now
- How Washington and Tehran Are Assessing Their Next StepsQ&A
Aaron David Miller, David Petraeus, Karim Sadjadpour
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
- Could the Rise of the New People Party Reshape Russia’s Managed Political System?Commentary
Anger over online restrictions has led to a surge in support for the New People party, which has replaced the Communists as Russia’s second most popular political party.
Andrey Pertsev
- In Russia, the Public Mood Is SouringCommentary
The Russian regime is now visibly motivated by fear.
Alexander Baunov
- The Rada Reawakens: Ukraine’s Messy Politics ReturnsCommentary
The return of parliamentary politics reflects a broader shift from earlier expectations of a settlement and elections toward the reality of a prolonged war.
Balázs Jarábik
- What Does Nuclear Proliferation in East Asia Mean for Russia?Commentary
Troubled by the growing salience of nuclear debates in East Asia, Moscow has responded in its usual way: with condemnation and threats. But by exacerbating insecurity, Russia is forcing South Korea and Japan to consider radical security options.
James D.J. Brown
- Who Is Responsible for the Demise of the Russian Internet?Commentary
The Russian state has opted for complete ideological control of the internet and is prepared to bear the associated costs.
Maria Kolomychenko
